But Hawkingbird, here's the real issue. You're not looking at the facts. It's ok to disagree if it's your personal belief, I for one will respect that. There are in fact a lot of people who've posted in this thread who don't smoke cannabis and don't encourage such behavior, but if you look at the concrete, scientific facts of cannabis toxicity (next to none for the most part, THC actually retards cancer cells), addiction (again, next to none, here I will refer you to a NY Times article from 1994 on the subject: http://www.tfy.drugsense.org/tfy/addictvn.htm) and economic benefits of industrial hemp, you'll see that there is a plethora of pros to legalization. Don't just parrot government propaganda, do the research yourself, and if you still disagree on a personal basis, I think you'll find that a lot of people here will respect you for it.

I'm sorry. She is a clearly a troll who posts unfounded and debunked pseudo-science in order to get a rise out of people.

I doubt anyone here would call marijuana harmless, but linking it to causing schizophrenia is unfounded. The gateway drug theory has been debunked repeatedly. And there is growing research showing that the drug has some benefits.

You don't have to like it, or the people that use it (I'm not one, by the way), but classifying it in the same schedule as heroin and spending billions on marijuana enforcement is objectively preposterous. Demonizing a relatively safe drug - a drug with zero recorded overdoses - is reckless and wrong. And if you think that prohibition reduces use, you're wrong.

Does the drug cause a minimal amount of harm to users? Sure. But so what? Fatty, sodium-laced food will kill you. Aspirin will. Too much water will. Marijuana won't. It creates criminals out of otherwise law-abiding citizens and wastes taxpayer money. To prohibit it because of relatively minor health concerns is a ridiculously disproportional response.

That, ma'am, is why you are a troll.

__________________

Itís the greatest gift we have - to bear their pain without breaking. And itís born from the most human power: hope.

In a country where obesity is gradually approaching the 50% mark, it's always a strange argument when people are totally cool with making it illegal to use something that causes minor health problems at best. Seems if you're seriously concerned about health, you'd be cracking down on things that're making half the population obese.

The most harm that comes from marijuana is the money and lives wasted on jailing people who smoke it, not the effects from actually smoking it.

In a country where obesity is gradually approaching the 50% mark, it's always a strange argument when people are totally cool with making it illegal to use something that causes minor health problems at best. Seems if you're seriously concerned about health, you'd be cracking down on things that're making half the population obese.

The most harm that comes from marijuana is the money and lives wasted on jailing people who smoke it, not the effects from actually smoking it.

That is ALL you need to know in regards to whether marijuana is harmful. The "drug" hasn't ruined lives....it is the man made laws making it illegal that has.

__________________It's only after we've lost everything that we are free to do anything.

I'm sorry. She is a clearly a troll who posts unfounded and debunked pseudo-science in order to get a rise out of people.

I doubt anyone here would call marijuana harmless, but linking it to causing schizophrenia is unfounded. The gateway drug theory has been debunked repeatedly. And there is growing research showing that the drug has some benefits.

You don't have to like it, or the people that use it (I'm not one, by the way), but classifying it in the same schedule as heroin and spending billions on marijuana enforcement is objectively preposterous. Demonizing a relatively safe drug - a drug with zero recorded overdoses - is reckless and wrong. And if you think that prohibition reduces use, you're wrong.

Does the drug cause a minimal amount of harm to users? Sure. But so what? Fatty, sodium-laced food will kill you. Aspirin will. Too much water will. Marijuana won't. It creates criminals out of otherwise law-abiding citizens and wastes taxpayer money. To prohibit it because of relatively minor health concerns is a ridiculously disproportional response.

That, ma'am, is why you are a troll.

Me opposing your views and having arguments that YOU deem invalid (even though they are not), does NOT make me a troll. You calling me a troll makes you a narrow minded bafoon who cannot see the other side of the argument.

Yes, they do infact. You're all one minded, so set on your drug that you refuse to see the other side. The truth it you cannot argue your view without taking into account the other person's.

Having read the last few pages I haven't seen any documented facts to support your argument. Anecdotal evidence does not a good argument make. I personally don't smoke marijuana. I hate the smell and see no point for me to partake. I do, however, support the rights of others should they decide to smoke. Studies have proven time and time again that it's not a life ruining super drug that's going to have all the negative repercussions ascribed to it.

You're all one minded, so set on your drug that you refuse to see the other side.

Actually, a lot of the people arguing against you here don't smoke weed. Nice try, though. This rhetorical trick might work against feeble-minded high school students, but it's going to be relatively ineffective against most of us.

You argue like a petulant fifteen year old. I wonder why?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hawkingbird

The truth it you cannot argue your view without taking into account the other person's.

So far you haven't backed up your argument beyond saying, "That's just my opinion." Every other attempt you've made has failed miserably and has been countered quite handily.

Of course, you're welcome to your opinion. The problem is that you've implied that we have no sense because we disagree, even though each of your arguments has been countered with logical reasoning and independent sources.

You can't say something like that and then back into a corner crying when it bites you in the ass.

Trying to pass an opinion off as fact is not. Unless there's good evidence to back it up.

Well said.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sun_Down

I'm sorry. She is a clearly a troll who posts unfounded and debunked pseudo-science in order to get a rise out of people.

I doubt anyone here would call marijuana harmless, but linking it to causing schizophrenia is unfounded. The gateway drug theory has been debunked repeatedly. And there is growing research showing that the drug has some benefits.

You don't have to like it, or the people that use it (I'm not one, by the way), but classifying it in the same schedule as heroin and spending billions on marijuana enforcement is objectively preposterous. Demonizing a relatively safe drug - a drug with zero recorded overdoses - is reckless and wrong. And if you think that prohibition reduces use, you're wrong.

Does the drug cause a minimal amount of harm to users? Sure. But so what? Fatty, sodium-laced food will kill you. Aspirin will. Too much water will. Marijuana won't. It creates criminals out of otherwise law-abiding citizens and wastes taxpayer money. To prohibit it because of relatively minor health concerns is a ridiculously disproportional response.

That, ma'am, is why you are a troll.

I want to like this but I don't believe in hitting women and you just intellectually slapped the hell out of her, so I can't like this.

It's easier to just label others and then cry victim then to actually debate. I would say it's a shame cause I love to hear dissenting opinion but then only when it's backed up by argument and not namecalling. "you're all just stupid potheads and you're mean to me (pout)" isn't really doing anything for me or your argument.

I'm leaving these boards. I've only just realized I'm trying to have a reasonable debate with one minded pot heads.

Actually, these "one minded potheads" were reasonably debating your opinions with solid facts to back up their arguments. But you didn't back any of yours up and furthermore kept repeating the same propagandist drivel, like a troll. Therefore you're entirely entitled to abandon the conversation but as wiegeabo said, you will not be missed.

Here's an excellent letter from Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (L.E.A.P).

Quote:

Dear Mr. Attorney General and Our Colleagues in the Department of Justice,

As fellow law enforcement and criminal justice professionals we respectfully call upon you to respect and abide by the democratically enacted laws to regulate marijuana in Colorado and Washington. This is not a challenge to you, but an invitation – an invitation to help return our profession to the principles that made us enter law enforcement in the first place.

We went into law enforcement, despite its long hours and constant frustrations, because we wanted to serve our communities. We wanted to save people, to protect them, and there are few more selfless and noble callings on this earth. But the second we overthrow the will of the people, we fail to live up to the promise of that calling.

The great American political writings upon which this country was founded were based in John Locke’s concept of the social contract, which recognizes that the authority of police, and of all government, is derived from the people. And the people have spoken. To disregard the fact is to undermine the legitimacy of the ideas for which our forefathers fought and died.

This is not merely an academic argument. August Vollmer, father of professional policing and primary author of the Wickersham Commission report that served to bring an end to the prohibition of alcohol, opposed the enforcement of drug laws, saying that they "engender disrespect both for law and for the agents of law enforcement." His words ring as true today as they did in 1929. After 40 years of the drug war, people no longer look upon law enforcement as heroes but as people to be feared. This is particularly true in poor neighborhoods and in those of people of color, and it impacts our ability to fight real crime.